harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Fedotov, Alexei A" <alexei.a.fedo...@intel.com>
Subject RE: [classlib][luni] signalis interruptus in hysock
Date Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:25:18 GMT
Guys,

Could you please help me to understand the following?

1. Is HARMONY-1904 actually a duplicate of my HARMONY-1879?
2. Ivan, do I remember correctly that you've already fixed that bug once
when debugging Eclipse long run failures? Where is that patch?

Thank you in advance.

With best regards,
Alexei Fedotov,
Intel Java & XML Engineering

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Weldon Washburn [mailto:weldonwjw@gmail.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 5:36 PM
>To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org; geir@pobox.com
>Subject: Re: [classlib][luni] signalis interruptus in hysock
>
>On 10/24/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Weldon Washburn wrote:
>> > It seems JIRA is down for maintenance.  If HARMONY-1904 is still
open
>> > perhaps it makes sense to put a counter in the while (...) {
select...}
>> > loop. And after every N loops, print a warning/diagnostic message.
>>
>> For whom and to what end?  Why not just return EINTR (in hysock
speak)?
>>
>> > The
>> > value for N would have to be tuned.  I don't know what the best
number
>> > would
>> > be. Given that 1904 patch is not the final solution, at least a
>> diagnostic
>> > that hints at where the system hangs would be useful.  It might
make
>> sense
>> > to even print a stack trace.   Also, I agree with Ivan below.
Signals
>> bugs
>> > are very hard to debug.  And diagnostics can help us all understand
the
>> > corner cases better.
>>
>> But so far, no one has shown that the system hangs, or can hang,
simply
>> because we return EINTR....
>
>
>Sorry for not being clear.  I was reacting to the patch in 1904 itself.
>Not
>the bigger issue of fixing the upper layers to comprehend EINTR.  My
>understanding is that this patch does not fix the problem.  This patch
does
>not return EINTR.  If for whatever reason this patch is committed, I
>recommend adding the above diagnostic code so that we don't dig
ourselves
>an
>even deeper hole.
>
>If it is decided 1904 should not be committed, it might make sense to
>close it with  "won't fix".
>
>geir
>>
>> >
>> > On 10/20/06, Ivan Volosyuk <ivan.volosyuk@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 10/20/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Ivan Volosyuk wrote:
>> >> > > Well, I think that the solution is what Geir suggests. One
think
>> >> which
>> >> > > bothers me is following. EINTR can happen in different places
and
>> the
>> >> > > situations can be quite rare in some circumstances. It can
lead to
>> >> > > hard to reproduce stability bugs (race conditions).
>> >> >
>> >> > Can you give an example?
>> >>
>> >> Half a year ago, I was working on the problem. Socket operations
get
>> >> sometimes interrupted. We have found out that it occurs sometime
after
>> >> GC. It was not quite easy as the application was quite big and
>> >> situation - quite rare.
>> >>
>> >> Given the fact, that current implementation of monitor reservation
>> >> code can stop other thread in quite random fashion we should have
rock
>> >> solid support of EINTR handling everywhere the select(), poll()
calls
>> >> is used.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Ivan
>> >> Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > > We should find a
>> >> > > way how to test the implementation.
>> >> >
>> >> > +1!
>> >> >
>> >> > :)
>> >> >
>> >> > geir
>> >>
>> >>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail:
harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>--
>Weldon Washburn
>Intel Middleware Products Division

Mime
View raw message